Cardinal Felipe Arizmendi, Bishop Emeritus of San Cristóbal de Las Casas and head of the Doctrine of the Faith at the Mexican Episcopal Conference (CEM), offers Exaudi readers his weekly article.

FACTS

In recent days, there has been renewed insistence that the laws of our country recognize the right to what they call a dignified death; that is, for a person with a terminal illness, or who no longer wishes to live for any reason, to sign an advance directive requesting the withdrawal of all treatments and allowing them to die, or to be given medication to end their lives. They describe this as an act of love for someone who no longer wishes to live because they are suffering greatly from their illness, or because there is no foreseeable cure. They call this legal initiative  “transcending,”  which means going beyond, although I don’t know what that “beyond” means to them. Those of us who oppose this practice are labeled inhuman, as if we were incapable of understanding the pain of someone who has grown tired of suffering. Technically, it is called euthanasia, although they don’t want to call it that because of the social rejection their initiative might face, but in practice, it is like suicide

Discussing these topics, a nurse told me:  “The commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ is true; but cancer patients scream from the pain. That is also sad. Or brain-dead patients intubated for months, already with sores all over their little bodies… Would you like to be like that? I see it every day, and it’s sad. Many things to analyze… Organ donations would save many lives if people donated; anyway, once they’re dead, what use are they to us?”  This is very real, and we cannot be insensitive to this pain, but the Christian faith gives us another dimension.

ILLUMINATION

For non-believers, euthanasia would be a solution; but for us, followers of Jesus, his example is our way. When he was suffering greatly on the cross, almost in agony, they offered him a drug to ease his pain, but as soon as he tasted it and realized what it was, he rejected it (cf. Mk 15:23). United to the sufferings of Jesus and offering our pains with him, these have a redemptive meaning for ourselves, for our people, and for all humanity. With Christ, suffering has a transcendent and redemptive dimension (cf. Col 1:24). This, however, is incomprehensible to non-believers.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says in this regard:

“ Those whose life is diminished or weakened have a right to special respect. Sick or disabled persons must be cared for so that they may lead as normal a life as possible  (2276). Whatever the motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in ending the life of disabled, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. Therefore, any action or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes homicide gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to respect for the living God, his Creator. An error of judgment into which one may have fallen in good faith does not change the nature of this homicidal act, which must always be rejected and excluded  (2277)”.

The discontinuation of medical treatments that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the results may be legitimate. Discontinuing such treatments is a rejection of “therapeutic obstinacy.” This does not mean causing death; it means accepting the inability to prevent it. Decisions must be made by the patient, if they have the competence and capacity to do so, or if not, by those with the legal rights, always respecting the patient’s reasonable wishes and legitimate interests (2278). Even if death is considered imminent, the ordinary care due to a sick person cannot be legitimately discontinued. The use of painkillers to relieve the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in accordance with human dignity if death is not intended, either as an end or as a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable. Palliative care constitutes a privileged form of disinterested charity. For this reason, it should be encouraged  (2279).

The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its Declaration Dignitas Infinita on human dignity, of April 2, 2024, says:

“There is a particular case of violation of human dignity, more silent, but which is gaining ground. It has the peculiarity of using a misconception of human dignity to turn it against life itself. This confusion, very common today, comes to light when euthanasia is discussed. For example, laws that recognize the possibility of euthanasia or assisted suicide are sometimes called death with dignity acts”. The idea that euthanasia or assisted suicide are compatible with respect for the dignity of the human person is widespread. In the face of this, it must be strongly reaffirmed that suffering does not cause the sick person to lose that dignity which is intrinsically and inalienably theirs, but can become an opportunity to strengthen the bonds of mutual belonging and to become more aware of how precious each person is to the whole of humanity  (51).

Certainly, the dignity of the sick person, in critical or terminal condition, demands that everyone make the appropriate and necessary efforts to alleviate their suffering through suitable palliative care, avoiding any therapeutic obstinacy or disproportionate intervention. This care responds to the “constant duty to understand the needs of the sick person: the need for assistance, relief from pain, emotional, affective, and spiritual needs.” But such an effort is entirely different, even contrary, to the decision to end one’s own life or the lives of others under the weight of suffering. Human life, even in its painful condition, bears a dignity that must always be respected, that cannot be lost, and whose respect remains unconditional. Indeed, there are no conditions in the absence of which human life ceases to be dignified and can therefore be suppressed: “life has the same dignity and the same value for each and every person: respect for the life of another is the same as that due to one’s own existence.” Assisting a suicidal person to take their own life is, therefore, an objective offense against the dignity of the person requesting it, even if their wish were fulfilled: “We must accompany people in death, but not cause death or assist any form of suicide. I recall that the right to care and care for all must always be given priority, so that the weakest, particularly the elderly and the sick, are never discarded. Life is a right, not death, which must be welcomed, not dispensed. And this ethical principal concerns everyone, not just Christians or believers.” As already stated, the dignity of each person, however weak or suffering, implies the dignity of all (52).

ACTIONS

Let us lovingly and responsibly accompany the terminally ill, who sometimes despair; let them not lack palliative care and let us help them find meaning in their pain, uniting their suffering to the cross of Christ, for the redemption of the world.